Summary: Early applications of LintPlus at 10% and 30% open bolls significantly reduced lint yields compared to the Cyclone Max applied at 70% open bolls and Prep plus Def applied at 50% open bolls followed by Cyclone Max treatments. No significant differences in net value/acre were noted between the Cyclone Max and Prep plus Def followed by Cyclone Max treatments. Results indicated that Cyclone Max applied in a single application at a high rate with relatively inexpensive cost ($10.20/acre) performed equally well for terminating Paymaster 2145RR cotton (hairy-leaf), when compared to Prep plus Def followed by Cyclone Max ($29.50/acre). No important differences in fiber quality, including color, leaf, and bark contamination were noted among any of the harvest-aid treatments. This is confirmed by the fact that lint loan values indicated that no major differences in lint quality were observed among treatments. It should also be noted that no inclement weather (i.e. rainfall) was encountered during the harvest-aid application period or during harvest. More research and evaluation is needed to determine which environments might result in less than optimal fiber quality arising from such treatments.

Objective: The objective of this project was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of several harvest-aid chemical alternatives on a large scale in a commercial cotton field.

Materials and

Methods: A uniform field of Paymaster 2145RR (hairy-leaf, stripper type) was selected on the David Norton Farm near Farwell, TX. Plots were eighteen 30-inch rows by variable field length (2479-3029 feet long). Treatments included:

1) LintPlus applied on September 17 at 10% open bolls at 20 oz/acre and followed by Cyclone Max at 18 oz/acre applied on October 8.

2) LintPlus applied on September 24 at 30% open bolls at 20 oz/acre and followed by Cyclone Max at 18 oz/acre applied on October 8.

3) LintPlus applied at 30% open bolls at 20 oz/acre with followed by Leafless at 8 oz/acre on October 8. Due to unacceptable termination, this treatment was followed by Cyclone Max at 18 oz/acre applied on October 12.

4) Cyclone Max at 70% open bolls at 18oz/acre on October 8.

5) Prep at 1.33 pt/acre tank mixed with Def 6 at1 pt/acre applied at 50% open bolls on October 1 followed by Cyclone Max at 18 oz/acre on October 8.

A randomized complete block design with 3 replications of treatments was used. Commercial applications were made by Kenny White of White Spraying Service, Farwell, TX, using a Spray Coupe calibrated to deliver 15 gallons/acre at 85 psi using 8003 Drift Guard spray nozzles. Plots were harvested on October 15 and 16 using a self-propelled John Deere 7455 cotton stripper with a field cleaner provided by Mr. Norton. The 6 middle rows of each plot were harvested and dumped into a Crust Buster weigh wagon with integral digital scales to determine individual plot weights. Plot yields were adjusted to lb/acre. Field-cleaned cotton from all replications of each treatment was composited into a single module, and modules were ginned separately at the Parmer County Cotton Growers Co-op near Farwell, TX. Commercial classing by the USDA-AMS office at Lubbock for was obtained on all (11) bales from each module and Loan values were used to determine lint value/acre. Ginning costs were based on $1.65 per cwt. of bur cotton and $100 per ton for seed value. Ginning cost do not include bagging, ties and checkoff.

Results and

Discussion: Significant differences were noted for most parameters measured (Table 1). Commercial turnouts of field-cleaned cotton indicated that the lowest turnout was obtained with the 10% open boll LintPlus treatment followed by Cyclone Max (30.83%) and the highest turnout was obtained with the Prep plus Def application followed by Cyclone Max (32.45%) treatment. Bur cotton yields ranged from a low of 4218 lb/acre to a high of 4606 lb/acre, and corresponding lint yields varied from a low of 1300 lb/acre for the 10% open boll LintPlus treatment followed by Cyclone Max to a high of 1415 lb/acre for the Prep plus Def application followed by Cyclone Max treatment. Early applications of LintPlus at 10% and 30% open bolls significantly reduced lint yields compared to the Cyclone Max applied at 70% open bolls and Prep plus Def applied at 50% open bolls followed by Cyclone Max treatments. Seed yields/acre were also affected by treatment and ranged from a low of 1701 lb/acre to a high of 2026 lb/acre. No important differences in fiber quality, including color, leaf, and bark contamination were noted among any of the harvest-aid treatments (Table 2). This is confirmed by the fact that lint loan values indicated no major differences in lint quality were observed among treatments (Table 1, ranged from $0.4591 to $0.4684/lb). Seed value/acre ranged from a low of $85.07 to a high of $101.32. Total gross value/acre ranged from a low of $682.13 to a high of $760.83. The Cyclone Max and Prep plus Def followed by Cyclone treatments resulted in the highest total gross values/acre. Ginning costs were somewhat confounded by yield level, but the Cyclone Max treatment had significantly higher ginning cost/acre due to lower gin turnout than the Prep plus Def followed by Cyclone Max treatment. After subtracting ginning and chemical costs (costs varied from $10.20/acre to $34.13/acre), net value/acre ranged from a low of $591.15 for the 10% open boll application of LintPlus followed by Cyclone Max to a high of $667.30 for the Cyclone Max treatment. However, no significant differences in net value/acre were noted between the Cyclone Max and Prep plus Def followed by Cyclone Max treatments. Results indicated that Cyclone Max applied in a single application at a high rate with relatively inexpensive cost ($10.20/acre) performed equally well for terminating Paymaster 2145RR cotton (hairy-leaf), when compared to Prep plus Def followed by Cyclone Max ($29.50/acre). It should be noted that no inclement weather (i.e. rainfall) was encountered during the harvest-aid application period or during harvest. More research and evaluation is needed to determine which environments might result in less than optimal fiber quality arising from such treatments.

Acknowledgments: The authors thank David and Pam Norton for the use of their land, labor, and equipment for this project. Kenny White of White Spraying Services went to considerable extra effort to make the applications in a very timely manner. Chase Hall with Uniroyal Chemical provided a tractor to assist with harvest. Ron Anderson is recognized for assisting with the location. Edwin Teltschik and his employees at the Parmer County Cotton Growers Co-op are also recognized for detailed module ginning and for assistance with the data. This project was conducted with financial support provided by Mr. Sidney Fox with Uniroyal Chemical.

Disclaimer Clause: Trade names of commercial products used in this report are included only for better understanding and clarity. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by the Texas A&M University System is implied. Readers should realize that results from one experiment do not represent conclusive evidence that the same response would occur where conditions vary.

Contact

AgriLife Bookstore

AgriLife Extension's online Bookstore offers educational information and resources related to our many areas of expertise and programming; from agriculture, horticulture, and natural resources to nutrition, wellness for families and youth, and much more.